DAMODARAM SANJIVAYYA NATIONAL LAW

UNIVERSITY

VISAKHAPATNAM, A.P., INDIA

PROJECT TITLE:
Inquest Report

SUBJECT:
Criminal Procedural Code

NAME OF THE FACULTY:

Assistant Professor, Ms. Soma Battacharjya

Name of the Candidate: Sai Suvedhya R.

Roll No.: 2018LLB076
Semester: 4th semester
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

1
I would like to express my sincere gratitude to my respected Criminal Procedural Code
professor – Assistant Professor, Ms. Soma Battacharjya , for giving me this golden
opportunity to take up this project titled – ‘Inquest Report’ and my sincere thanks to her for
her continuous support of my study and related research, for her time, patience, motivation
and immense knowledge. Her guidance has helped during the entire of process of my
research. I could not have imagined having a better advisor and mentor for my research.

2
TABLE OF CONTENTS

CHAPTER I

 Introduction ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ 04
 Inquest Report under Section 174 ----------------------------------------------------------- 05
 Scope of the Law of Inquest ----------------------------------------------------------------- 07
 Objectives of the Law of Inquest ----------------------------------------------------------- 07

CHAPTER II

 Duties of Executive Magistrates in Inquest Proceedings -------------------------------- 10

 Dowry Death – Section 174(3) -------------------------------------------------------------- 12
 Inquest in cases where death is caused by Suicide --------------------------------------- 13
 Evidentiary Value of Inquest Report ------------------------------------------------------- 14

CHAPTER III

 Magisterial Enquiry - Section 176 of CrPC ----------------------------------------------- 16

 Scope of Magisterial Enquiry --------------------------------------------------------------- 18
 Difference between Section 174 and 154 of CrPC --------------------------------------- 18
 Conclusion ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 24
 Bibliography ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 25

3
INTRODUCTION

Criminal investigation is a search for truth and anything which aids this, search should be
encouraged. The scope of Article 21 of Constitution of India includes the right to know or
right to have the correct information and this will also include the right to know the correct
cause of death of any person. Serious concern has been expressed at various quarters on
account of recent abnormal spurt in the unnatural deaths, especially at places like hospitals,
police firings, police encounters, railways & other vehicles, and even in the household by
way of dowry deaths. It has also been found that in criminal cases, the divergent post-mortem
reports and the statements of the witnesses have led to an alarming rate of acquittal. Thus, the
public interest will be greatly served, and the moral fabric of our democratic government
would be considerably strengthened, if the correct and true cause of death of any person is
known, especially when the death is unnatural or there are surrounding suspicious
circumstances. The preparation of ‘inquest’ report is an important aspect of investigation. The
term inquest means legal or judicial inquiry to ascertain the matter of fact. Inquest implies
inquiry about case of death, which is apparently not due to natural causes.

When a person does not die due to the natural circumstances, a person is considered victim
of unnatural death. Some of the causes of unnatural deaths are accidental death, murders,
animal attack, complications of surgery, suicide and many more.

Such an inquiry is necessary to apprehend and punish the offender. It is a sort of preliminary
inquiry into the cause of a sudden, suspicious and unnatural death, known as inquest. An
inquest is a fact finding inquiry, conducted by an appointed authority with or without a jury,
to establish reliable answers regarding identity of the deceased, place and time of his death.
According to the Black’s Law Dictionary, the word ‘inquest’ means an inquiry by medical
officer or sometimes with the aid of a jury into the manner of death of a person, who has died
under suspicious circumstances or who has died in prison.

If a person dies naturally, then there lies no suspicion so as to the death of the person. But in
case of unnatural death, the death is caused due to circumstances which need to be explained
and examined. There lies an obligation on the state to secure the health and life of every
citizen of the country. In order to provide for the procedure in case a person dies unnaturally,
Section 174 was created that lays down the procedure the police officer and the magistrate
must follow in case of untimely deaths.

4
INQUEST REPORT UNDER SECTION 174

For the purpose of the unnatural deaths, the executive magistrate upon the intimation by the
Station House Officer or some other Police Officer specially empowered by the State
Government shall prepare an inquest report which shall contain the minute details regarding
the cause of death of a person. Inquest report is prepared by District Magistrate, Additional
District Magistrate, Sub-divisional Magistrate, or Mandal Executive Magistrate especially
empowered in this behalf by the State Government when the deaths are sudden and
unexplained. According to section 174:

“Police to enquire and report on suicide, etc.

(1)  When the officer in charge of a police station or some other police officer specially
empowered by the State Government in that behalf receives information that a person has
committed suicide, or has been killed by another or by an animal or by machinery or by an
accident, or has died under circumstances raising a reasonable suspicion that some other
person has committed an offence, he shall immediately give intimation thereof to the nearest
Executive Magistrate empowered to hold inquests, and, unless otherwise directed by any rule
prescribed by the State Government, or by any general or special order of the District or
Sub- divisional Magistrate, shall proceed to the place where the body
of such deceased person is, and there, in the presence of two' or more respectable inhabitants
of the neighbourhood, shall make an investigation, and draw up a report of the apparent
cause of death, describing such wounds, fractures, bruises, and other marks of injury as may
be found on the body, and stating in what manner, or by what weapon or instrument (if any);
such marks appear to have been inflicted.
(2)  The report shall be signed by such police officer and other persons, or by so many of
them as concur therein, and shall be forthwith forwarded to the District Magistrate or the
Sub- divisional Magistrate.
(3) When-
(i) the case involves suicide by a woman within seven years of her marriage; or
(ii) the case relates to the death of a woman within seven years of her marriage in any
circumstances raising a reasonable suspicion that some other person committed an offence
in relation to such woman; or
(iii)  the case relates to the death of a woman within seven years of her marriage and any
relative of the woman has made a request in this behalf; or
(iv) there is any doubt regarding the cause of death; or

5
(v) the police officer for any other reason considers it expedient so to do, he shall. subject to
such rules as the State Government may prescribe in this behalf, forward the body, with a
view to its being examined, to the nearest Civil Surgeon, or other qualified medical man
appointed in this behalf by the State Government, if the state of the weather and the distance
admit of its being so forwarded without risk of such putrefaction on the road as would render
such examination useless.
(4)  The following Magistrates are empowered to hold inquests, namely, any District
Magistrate or Sub- divisional Magistrate and any other Executive Magistrate specially
empowered in this behalf by the State Government or the District Magistrate.”
Therefore, section 174 talks about cases where deaths are caused due to suicide, murder,
animal attack, death by machinery, dowry death or any other circumstance where there is a
reasonable suspicion that some other person has committed the offence.

For preparing the report, the magistrate shall be investigating the cause of death. In the report, the
magistrate must describe the apparent cause of death where he shall describe the smallest of
details that he comes across upon investigation of the dead body. Some of the details that the
magistrate must describe are:

 Nature of surrounding where the dead body is found.

 Any wounds, fractures, bruises, and other marks that may be found on the body.
The magistrate must state the manner in which any wound or injury or any other
mark happened to be on the body, whether the mark is by birth, or otherwise that
caused the death of the person.
 The marks if caused by any weapon or an instrument.

In the case of Kuldeep Singh v State of Punjab1, the Supreme Court has held that the
contents of the inquest report cannot be treated as evidence, but they can be looked into to
test the veracity of a witness.

SCOPE OF THE LAW OF INQUEST

1
Kuldeep Singh v State of Punjab (2005) 3 RCR 599 (P&H).

6
The provisions of section 174 and 175 of CrPC provide a complete and autonomous Code in
itself for the purposes of inquiries in cases of accidental or suspicious deaths under section
174. Section 174, 175 and 176 of CrPC deal with inquiries into suicide or inquiries into
sudden, violent or unnatural deaths, Section 174 provides for inquest of such inquiries by the
police and section 176 provides for inquest by Magistrates. The police officer making an
inquiry under this section cannot order the exhumation of a human body but a Magistrate can
do so under section 175, which should be read in conjunction with section 174. Enquiry
under section 174 is permissible till inquest is over. It is the duty of the nearest Magistrate so
empowered to hold an enquiry into the cause of death either instead of or in addition to
investigation held by the police officer under section 174 of CrPC. If after an enquiry under
Section 174 or 176 of CrPC during which statements are also to be recorded, if evidence and
materials are collected to make it a prima facie case of any offence, a regular investigation
was to follow even without any formal complaint from anybody. The proceedings under
section 174 however have a limited scope.2

OBJECTIVES OF THE LAW OF INQUEST

The objective of the inquest proceedings is merely to ascertain whether a person has died
under unnatural circumstances or an unnatural death and if so, what the cause of death is. The
question regarding the details as to how the deceased was assaulted or who assaulted him or
under what circumstances he was assaulted is foreign to the ambit of scope of the
proceedings under section 174. The names of the assailants and the manner of assault are not
required to be mentioned in the inquest report. The purpose of preparing the inquest report is
for making a note in regard to identification marks of the accused. The purpose of holding an
inquest is very limited, to ascertain as to whether a person has committed suicide or has been
killed by another or by an animal or by machinery or by an accident or has died under
circumstances raising a reasonable suspicion that some other person has committed an
offence.

Details of Assault and Assailant - The proceedings under section 174 relating to inquest
report have a very limited scope. The object of the proceedings is to ascertain whether a
person had died under the circumstances which were doubtful or an unnatural death and if so
what is the cause of death. The questions regarding details such as how the deceased was
2
Podda Narayana v. State of A.P. AIR 1975 SC 1252

7
assaulted or who assaulted him, etc. are beyond the scopes of the proceedings under this
section. Details of overt acts in the inquest report are not necessary as the scope of
proceeding under this section is very limited. An inquest report is not substantive evidence.
Therefore questions regarding the details as to how the deceased was assaulted or who
assaulted him or under what circumstances he was assaulted, are beyond the scope of the
report submitted by the police under section 174 of CrPC.

Details of Injuries of Deceased- The report of inquest is primarily intended at finding out
the nature of injuries and the apparent cause of death, while the doctor who holds post-
mortem examination examines the body of the deceased from the medico legal point of view
and accordingly it is the post-mortem report that is supposed to contain the details of the
injuries though scientific examinations.

Absence of names of Witnesses- Mere absence of names of witness of crime in the inquest
report does not render the evidence of witnesses doubtful. The evidence of a witness cannot
be rejected merely because his name is not mentioned in inquest report. Absence of the name
of the eye witness in the inquest report is not a ground to refuse to rely on his evidence. It is
not necessary that the names of eye witnesses should be mentioned in the inquest memo. An
inquest under this section is concerned with establishing the cause of death. 3 It is not
necessary that all witnesses be examined. Absence of the name of a witness in the inquest
report does not prove that he was not an eye witness to the occurrence.

Absence of names of Accused- There is no provision in law or practice requiring the police
to mention the names of the assailants in the inquest report, omission to do so is not fatal. The
names of the accused persons and the weapons possessed by them need not be mentioned in
the inquest report. The omission of the name of the accused in the inquest report does not
lead to the inference that the name of the accused was not disclosed as murderer till the
completion of the inquest report. Where there is no column in inquest report for mentioning
the name of the assailants, omission of the names of the assailant in the inquest report is not
fatal. The omission of the name of accused in inquest report is not fatal to prosecution case.
Mention of the name of accused and eye witness in the inquest report is not necessary 4. Due

3
Shakila Khader v. Nausher Gama AIR 1975 SC 1324
4
Surendra Tiwari v. State of Madhya Pradesh AIR 1991 SC 1853

8
to non-mentioning the name of the accused in the inquest report, it cannot be inferred that
FIR was not in existence at the time of inquest proceedings.

Merely because the witnesses on the inquest report who are also eye witnesses did not give
out the name of the accused persons while describing the cause of death in the inquest report
does not render the presence of the eye witness on the spot doubtful.

Omission of accused’s weapon- The name of the weapon possessed by the accused need not
be mentioned in the inquest report. Non-mentioning of the weapon of assault, is not fatal,
because the purpose of inquest report is to record apparent cause of death describing the
injuries as may be found on the body of the deceased. The opinion given in the inquest report
does not attain finality because the dead body has to be subjected to post-mortem
examination, which is done by medical expert and is more authentic. The mention in the
inquest report that deceased died of gunshot was held sufficient, omission of the type of the
gun was held of no consequence.5

Omission of empty cartridges- Non-mentioning in the inquest report of empty cartridges

found near the dead body of the deceased does not rule out the presence of empty cartridges
on the spot. If the injuries are also not described in details in the inquest report, it is not a
circumstance against the prosecution because the investigating officer is not a medical expert.

Omission of crime number- Where the investigating officer has deposed that the omission
of the crime number in inquest report is by mistake, the convincing and reliable evidence of
eye witnesses cannot be disbelieved. Where the FIR has been lodged promptly, the omission
to mention crime number in the inquest report cannot be attached significance. The inquest
report is a document of vital importance and has to be prepared promptly.

Delay in inquest- if the inquest report is unreasonably delayed, then begins the scope for
questioning the genuineness of the FIR, its contents and the time of its recording 6. In case of
dowry deaths it would be of considerable assistance if an appropriate high priority is given to
the expeditious investigation, if special magisterial machinery is created for prompt
investigation and efficient investigative techniques and procedures are followed7.
5
Amar Singh v. Balwinder Singh 2003 (2) SCC 518
6
Radha Mohan Singh v. Lal Saheb, AIR 2006 SC 951
7
Shri Bhagwant Singh v. Commissioner of Police, Delhi, 1983 Cr.L.J. 1081 at 1086 (SC)

9
Absence of prescribed form- The form no. 211 prescribed by the U.P., Police Regulations
no doubt contains the column relating to the name of the complainant, time of
commencement and time of conclusion of the inquest report. They appear to have been
prescribed in the form for the purpose of having check on the movement and conduct of the
police officials. It cannot give the handle to spoil the prosecution case by merely omitting to
mention them in the prescribed form of the inquest report and related papers. Similarly, the
complete entries without committing any omission or lapse in preparing the inquest report
form, can give any premium to the prosecution case. It has to be judged in each case as to
what is the effect of such lapses. It is settled law that taking singly such lapses cannot be
sufficient to lead to the conclusion that the investigation was tainted or unfair. Where
interpolation has been made in inquest report, prosecution case is rendered doubtful.

Admissibility of statements recorded during inquest- The statement of a witness recorded

by the investigators during the inquest would be within the inhibition of section 162 of CrPC.
The statement recorded under section 174 of CrPC cannot be used as a substantive piece of
evidence. At the most it can be used only as a previous statement to corroborate or contradict
the person making it at the trial. The statements contained in an inquest report, to the extent
they relate to what the investigating officer saw and found are admissible, but any statement
made therein on the basis of what he heard from others, would be hit by section 162 of CrPC.
Where inquest report is signed by witnesses, the statements made in inquest report are hit by
section 162 of CrPC and will, therefore, not be admissible as evidence, if they were not
examined as witnesses at trial8. However, section 174 of CrPC, does not put embargo on the
powers of the police officers from obtaining the signatures of the witnesses on their
respective statements.

DUTIES OF EXECUTIVE MAGISTRATES IN INQUEST PROCEEDINGS

Section 174 lays down the duties that a magistrate must do upon intimidation by the police
officer of the cases of unnatural death. The police officer is bound to give intimidation to the
nearest Magistrate who is empowered to hold inquests, when he receives information
regarding the unnatural death of person.

8
Nirpal Singh. v. State of Haryana, AIR 1977 SC 1066

10
 1. The foremost duty of a Magistrate is to determine the cause of unnatural death.
The magistrate shall examine and body and upon investigation conclude as to the
reason which caused the death of the person. The death maybe caused by any
reason as mentioned in the Section 174 (1) of CrPC.
2. Since Section 174 is very limited in its scope, therefore it is restricted to the
suspicious circumstances that caused the unnatural death of a person and the
magistrate has no scope or authority under this section to trace the person who has
so caused the death. In the case of Radha Mohan Singh v State of Uttar Pradesh 9,
the Supreme Court held that section 174 is limited in confined to the ascertainment
of the apparent cause of death. The magistrate is therefore bound by the limited
scope of Section 174 and does not have to trace the person who has caused the
death or determine who assaulted the dead person or in what manner or under what
circumstances, etc. It is duty of the magistrate therefore to not mention the name of
the accused on the inquest report. It will lead to the report being held
unsustainable.
3. In case no foul play is found in the death of the person, the dead body must be
handed over to the legal heirs of the deceased.
4. In cases where there is suspicion over the death of the deceased, then the dead
body must be sent to the Government Medical Officer for post mortem.
5. The magistrate need not examine all the witnesses while performing investigation
for a cause of unnatural death. In the case of Shakila Khader v Nausher Gama10,
the apex court held that for the purpose of preparing the inquest report, there need
not be examination of all the witnesses as the purpose of the inquest is only to
establish the cause of death. If a person’s name is not mentioned in the inquest
report, it does not lead to the assumption that he was not an eye-witness to the
incident. An inquest report is concerned with establishing the cause of death and
only evidence to establish it needs to be brought out.
6. The report must be prepared by the magistrate in a prescribed format. But if a
report is no prepared in a prescribed format, the report cannot be declared as
unacceptable.
7. The magistrate must conduct the investigation in presence of two or more
respectable inhabitants of the neighbourhood. In case when no resident is there on

9
Radha Mohan Singh v State of Uttar Pradesh (2006) 2 SCC 450.
10
Shakila Khader v Nausher Gama AIR 1975 SC 1324.

11
 the spot or when no one volunteers to be a witness of the investigation, the inquest
report may be prepared without the presence of respectable citizens.
8. On completion of the report, the magistrate must get such report signed by the
police officer who informed him of the death and the other persons as well who
were part of the investigation. The report must be then forwarded to the District
Magistrate or the Sub-divisional Magistrate.

DOWRY DEATH – SECTION 174(3)

In the year 1983, there were a large number of cases reported of deaths caused because of the
demand for dowry. Woman who could pay the demand after marriage were either brutally
treated or they were murdered. In order to control the inflammatory situation of dowry death,
the Parliament inserted Section 304-B in the Indian Penal code by the Dowry Prohibition
(Amendment) Act, 1986. Section 304-B of IPC says that if the death of a woman is caused by
such bodily injury or otherwise than under normal circumstances or if she is subjected to
cruelty or harassment for demand of dowry and if such death or act of cruelty is caused
within seven years of marriage, then the husband or his relative will be deemed to have
caused her death.

The parliamentarians also inserted Section 498-A in the Indian Penal Code by the Criminal
Law Amendment Act, 1983 (Act 46 of 1983), which penalizes cruelty by husband or his
relative on a woman for any unlawful demand for any property or valuable security or is on
account of failure by her or any person related to her to meet such demand, which forces her
to commit suicide or cause grave injury or danger to her life.

The criminal amendment act of 1983 also inserted cl. 3 in the Code of Criminal Procedure,
1973 to curb the increasing incidents of dowry deaths. This sub-section says that if the death
of a woman is caused within seven years of marriage and if there is any reasonable suspicion
over the death of the woman that an offence has been committed under Section 304-B and
498-A of the IPC in this regard, the police officer should subject to such rules as the State
Government may prescribe in this behalf, send the body for post-mortem examination by the
nearest civil surgeon, over the request made by any relative of the deceased woman.
The police in order to exercise this discretion must fulfill two conditions:

1. Death of woman is caused within seven years of marriage.

12
 2. A request is made by any relative of the woman in this behalf.

If the state of the weather and the distance admit of its being so forwarded without risk of
such putrefaction (the process of decay or rotting in a body or other organic matter) on the
road as would render such examination useless, the body may be forwarded to other qualified
medical man appointed in this behalf by the State Government.

Sub-section (3) provides that if the police officer has no doubt over the cause of death, he has
the discretion of not sending the dead body for medical examination. The discretion must be
exercised prudently and honestly.

INQUEST IN CASES WHERE DEATH IS CAUSED BY SUICIDE

The incoming of The Mental Healthcare Act, 2017 has decriminalized suicides. Section 115
of the said act overrides the provision of Section 309 of IPC; the person committing suicide
shall be presumed to be innocent unless proven otherwise. So, now a person cannot be
arrested for making an attempt to commit suicide and thereby no FIR. There is no restriction
on filing of a FIR in cases of abetment to suicide. If a person commits suicide, firstly it is the
duty of the Medical Examiner to determine the cause of death of the person whether it is
caused due to natural, accidental, homicidal or suicidal. After the determination that the death
is caused by suicide, the police officer need to step up and perform the necessary functions.
He shall investigate into the matter and determine the reasons of the suicide.

It is the duty of the police officer to collect evidence so as to the manner of death due to
suicide. The evidence may be physical, documentary or circumstantial. Physical evidence
includes fingerprint, blood, etc. Documentary evidence includes testimonials or records that
are on paper. Circumstantial evidence includes chronological presentation of facts.

If the investigation states that a person has abetted the suicide, a FIR shall be lodged against
such person and he shall be arrested. If the police are reluctant to file a FIR, then a private
complaint with the judicial magistrate court under Section 156(3) of the Code of Criminal
Procedure can be made and the magistrate may direct the police to investigate and lodge a
FIR. If the investigation for a suicide is wrongly ruled, then family of the deceased will be
burdened with unnecessary grief. Therefore, the investigation must be done with utmost care.

13
EVIDENTIARY VALUE OF INQUEST REPORT

The statement made by the investigating officer in inquest report is not a statement made by
any witness before the police during investigation but it is a record of what the Investigating
Officer himself observed and found, such an evidence is the direct or the primary evidence in
the case and is in the eye of law the best evidence. Unless the record is proved to be suspect
and unreliable, perfunctory or dishonest, there is no reason to disbelieve such a statement in
the inquest report. A statement in inquest report does not fall within the four corners of
section 162. The statement of the Investigating officer in the inquest report is not a statement
made by any witness before the police during the investigation. Inquest report and post-
mortem report cannot be termed to be basic or substantive evidence and any discrepancy
occurring therein can neither be termed to be fatal nor even a suspicious circumstance which
would warrant a benefit to the accused and the resultant dismissal of the prosecution case.
The contents of inquest report cannot be treated as evidence, but they can be looked into to
test the veracity of the witnesses.

Discrepancy between inquest report and post-mortem report- Post-mortem is conducted

by an expert; hence opinion expressed by him would carry more weight than the opinion and
findings of a layman given in inquest report.

Signature of eye witness- The practice of getting eye-witness sign the inquest report is not
only unwholesome but unwarranted.

Condition of body- When the body remained fully exposed to the heat and humidity for over
thirty hours, it is not surprising that the rigor mortis had passed off ordinarily. After rigor
mortis has passed off, the process of purification sets in but it may set in even earlier during
summer depending on the heat and humidity. The body changing colour and emitting foul
smell are the two special characteristics of the decomposition process.

Inquest in Presidency Towns- In the Presidency Towns of Bombay and Calcutta the coroner
holds inquests, and not the police, under the Coroner’s Act (IV of 1871). In Madras the office
of Coroner has been abolished by Act V of 1889.

14
Metropolitan Magistrate can hold inquiry after Coroner’s inquest- A Metropolitan
Magistrate is not ousted of his jurisdiction because the Coroner has held an inquiry into the
cause of death of a person and drawn up an inquisition. He is competent to hold a preliminary
inquiry even though the accused has been committed to the High Court by the Coroner. No
analogy exists between a Coroner’s inquest and inquiry into the cause of death under the
CrPC.

Power to summon persons for inquest- A police officer proceeding under section 174 CrPC
may, by order in writing, summon two or more persons as aforesaid for the purpose of the
said investigation, and any other person who appears to be acquainted with the facts of the
case and every person so summoned shall be bound to attend and to answer truly all questions
other than questions the answers to which would have a tendency to expose him to a criminal
charge or to a penalty or forfeiture.

There is no need to examine all the eye witnesses at an inquest. It is not incumbent on the
police-officer to record verbatim and separate statements of the persons examined by him
under the section. This section empowers him to summon any person who appears to be
acquainted with the facts of the case and every person to summoned shall be bound to attend
the inquest and answer truly all the questions other than questions the answers to which
would have a tendency to expose him to a criminal charge or to a penalty or forfeiture. The
statement made by such person is a “previous statement” with the meaning of section 162 of
CrPC and it shall not be signed. So the statement made by such a person to police officer is in
the course of the investigation, and when reduce to writing, it shall be used only by the
accused to contradict such witness in the manner provided by section 145 of the Evidence
Act, 1872 or with the permission of the court the prosecution could use if for re-examination
only to explain the matter referred to its cross examination. The witness must answer all
questions. Refusal to answer question is punishable. Again, the person examined at an inquest
is bound to answer truly all questions other than questions the answers to which would be
incriminating. Section 161 CrPC, also imposes such an obligation to speak the truth. A
witness speaking falsely under this section commits the offence of intentionally giving false
evidence.

MAGISTERIAL ENQUIRY – SECTION 176 OF CRPC

15
Section 176 of CrPC states that:

“Inquiry by Magistrate into cause of death.

(1)  When any person dies while in the custody of the police or when the case is of the nature
referred to in clause (i) or clause (ii) of sub- section (3) of section 174] the nearest
Magistrate- empowered to hold inquests shall, and in any other case mentioned in sub-
section (1) of section 174, any Magistrate so empowered may hold an inquiry into the cause
of death either instead of, or in addition to, the investigation held by the police officer; and if
he does so, he shall have all the powers in conducting it which he would have in holding an
inquiry into an offence.
(2)  The Magistrate holding such an inquiry shall record the evidence taken by him in
connection therewith in any manner hereinafter prescribed according to the circumstances of
the case.
(3)  Whenever such Magistrate considers it expedient to make an examination of the dead
body of any person who has been already interred, in order to discover the cause of his
death, the Magistrate may cause the body to be disinterred and examined.
(4)  Where an inquiry is to be held under this section, the Magistrate shall, wherever
practicable, inform the relatives of the deceased whose names and addresses are known, and
shall allow them to remain present at the inquiry.” 

When any person dies while in the custody of the police or when the case is of the nature
referred to in clause (i) or clause(ii) of sub-section (3) of section 174, the nearest Magistrate
empowered to hold inquests shall, and in any other case mentioned in sub-section (1) of
section 174, any Magistrate so empowered may hold an inquiry into the cause of death either
instead of, or in addition to, the investigation held by the police officer ; and if he does so, he
shall have all the powers in conducting it which he would have in holding an inquiry into an
offence.

Where any person dies or disappears, or rape is alleged to have been committed on any
woman, while such person or woman is in the custody of the police or in any other custody
authorized the magistrate or the Court, under CrPC., in addition to the inquiry or
investigation held by the police, an enquiry shall be held by the Judicial Magistrate or the

16
Metropolitan Magistrate, as the case may be within whose local Jurisdiction the offence has
been committed. The Magistrate holding such an inquiry shall record the evidence taken by
him in connection therewith according to the circumstances of the case. Whenever such
Magistrate considers it expedient to make an examination of the dead body of any person
who has been already interred or buried, in order to discover the cause of his death, the
Magistrate may cause the body to be disinterred and examined.

Where an inquiry is to be held under this section, the Magistrate shall, wherever practicable,
inform the relatives of the deceased whose names and addresses are known, and shall allow
them to remain present at the inquiry. The Judicial Magistrate or the Metropolitan Magistrate
or Executive Magistrate or police officer holding an inquiry or investigation, as the case may
be, shall, within twenty-four hours of the death of a person, forward the body with a view to
its being examined to the nearest Civil Surgeon or other qualified medical man appointed in
this behalf by the State Government, unless it is not possible to do so for reasons to be
recorded in writing. In case of an inquest near relatives of the deceased shall be informed.

The Law Commissioners in 37th Report observed as follows: - “A suggestion to inform the
relatives of the person whose dead body in the subject-matter of the inquest under section 176
has been found worth accepting, and we recommend a provision to that effect. ‘Relatives’ in
this contest would mean father, mother, son, daughter, wife or husband as far as can be
ascertained. The obligation will be to inform them, as far as practicable.”

Section 176 of CrPC was amended to provide that in the case of death or disappearance of a
person or rape of a woman while in the custody of a police, there shall be a mandatory
judicial inquiry and in case of death, examination of the dead body shall be conducted within
24 hours of death of the deceased.

SCOPE OF MAGISTERIAL ENQUIRY

When any person dies whilst in custody of the police, it is obligatory on the nearest
magistrate to hold an inquest. In any other case mentioned in section 174 (1) of CrPC, the
Magistrate may hold an inquest either instead of, or in addition to, the investigation held by
the police office. The relatives of the dead person should, whenever possible, be notified and
allowed to be present in the inquiry. Upon a direction by Government the Magistrate holds an

17
inquiry under section 174 and 176 of CrPC, and records evidence and submits a report to the
Government; while acting so the Magistrate does not function as a court and no revision
against it will lie. Joint inquiry by the police and Magistrate under section 176 of CrPC, is
prohibited. The proceedings under section 176 of CrPC, are judicial proceedings and the
High Court can exercise its jurisdiction over such proceedings under section 397 and 401 or
under section 482 of CrPC.

DIFFERENCE BETWEEN SECTION 174 AND 154 OF CRPC

In a recent judgment delivered by the Supreme Court of India of Manoj Kumar Sharma and
Others vs. State of Chattisgarh and Others11, the Apex Court has held that delay in
registration in F.I.R would result in quashing of the same altogether. The Court further
elaborated the difference between the Proceedings under Section 154 and Section 174 of the
Code. The below mentioned discussion may be noted in this regard.

The proceedings under section 174 have a very limited scope. The object of the proceedings
is merely to ascertain whether a person has died under suspicious circumstances or an
unnatural death and if so what the apparent cause of the death is. The question regarding the
details as to how the deceased was assaulted or who assaulted him or under what
circumstances he was assaulted is foreign to the ambit and scope of the proceedings Under
Section 174 of the Code. Neither in practice nor in law was it necessary for the police to
mention those details in the inquest report. It is, therefore, not necessary to enter all the
details of the overt acts in the inquest report.
The procedure Under Section 174 is for the purpose of discovering the cause of death, and
the evidence taken was very short. When the body cannot be found or has been buried, there
can be no investigation Under Section 174. This Section is intended to apply to cases in
which an inquest is necessary. The proceedings under this Section should be kept more
distinct from the proceedings taken on the complaint.
Whereas the starting point of the powers of police was changed from the power of the officer
in charge of a police station to investigate into a cognizable offence without the order of a
Magistrate, to the reduction of the first information regarding commission of a cognizable
offence, whether received orally or in writing, into writing. As such, the objective of such

11
Manoj Kumar Sharma and Others vs. State of Chattisgarh and Others (2016) 9 SCC 1.

18
placement of provisions was clear which was to ensure that the recording of the first
information should be the starting point of any investigation by the police.
The purpose of registering FIR is to set the machinery of criminal investigation into motion,
which culminates with filing of the police report and only after registration of FIR, beginning
of investigation in a case, collection of evidence during investigation and formation of the
final opinion is the sequence which results in filing of a report Under Section 173 of the
Code. In George and Ors. v. State of Kerala and Anr.12, it has been held that the
investigating officer is not obliged to investigate, at the stage of inquest, or to ascertain as to
who were the assailants. A similar view has been taken in Suresh Rai and Ors. v. State of
Bihar13.
It was held that Sections 174 and 175 of the Code afford a complete Code in itself for the
purpose of “Inquiries” in cases of accidental or suspicious deaths and are entirely distinct
from the “investigation” Under Section 157 of the Code wherein if an officer in-charge of a
police station has reason to suspect the commission of an offence which he is empowered to
investigate, he shall proceed in person to the spot to investigate the facts and circumstances of
the case. In view of the above, it was held that the investigation on an inquiry Under Section
174 of the Code is distinct from the investigation as contemplated Under Section 154 of the
Code relating to commission of a cognizable offence.

The Court further held that delay in lodging the FIR often results in embellishment, which is
a creature of an afterthought. On account of delay, the FIR not only gets bereft of the
advantage of spontaneity, danger also creeps in of the introduction of a coloured version or
exaggerated story. In this context, it is apt to quote the following decision of this Court in Jai
Prakash Singh v. State of Bihar and Anr.14, where it was held as under:
“The FIR in a criminal case is a vital and valuable piece of evidence though may not be
substantive piece of evidence. The object of insisting upon prompt lodging of the FIR in
respect of the commission of an offence is to obtain early information regarding the
circumstances in which the crime was committed, the names of the actual culprits and the
part played by them as well as the names of the eye-witnesses present at the scene of
occurrence. If there is a delay in lodging the FIR, it loses the advantage of spontaneity;
danger creeps in of the introduction of coloured version, exaggerated account or concocted
story as a result of large number of deliberations. Undoubtedly, the promptness in lodging the
12
George and Ors. v. State of Kerala and Anr. (1998) 4 SCC 605
13
Suresh Rai and Ors. v. State of Bihar: (2000) 4 SCC 84.
14
Jai Prakash Singh v. State of Bihar and Anr.: (2012) 4 SCC 379

19
FIR is an assurance regarding truth of the informant’s version. A promptly lodged FIR
reflects the firsthand account of what has actually happened, and who was responsible for the
offence in question.”
Whether an offence has been disclosed or not, must necessarily depends on the facts and
circumstances of each case. If on consideration of the relevant materials, the Court is satisfied
that an offence is disclosed, it will normally not interfere with the investigation into the
offence and will generally allow the investigation into the offence to be completed in order to
collect materials for proving the offence. This point has been more clarified in State of
Haryana and Ors. v. Bhajan Lal and Ors15, where the Court also stated that though it may
not be possible to lay down any precise, clearly defined, sufficiently channelised and
inflexible guidelines or rigid formulae or to give an exhaustive list of myriad kinds of cases
wherein power under Section 482 of the Code for quashing of the FIR should be exercised,
there are circumstances where the Court may be justified in exercising such jurisdiction.
These are, where the FIR does not prima facie constitute any offence, does not disclose a
cognizable offence justifying investigation by the police; where the allegations are so absurd
and inherently improbable on the basis of which no prudent person can ever reach a just
conclusion that there is sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused; where there is
an expressed legal bar engrafted in any of the provisions of the Code; and where a criminal
proceeding is manifestly attended with mala fide and/or where the proceeding is maliciously
instituted with an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on the accused and with a view to
spite him due to private and personal grudge. Despite stating these grounds, the Court
unambiguously uttered a note of caution to the effect that the power of quashing a criminal
proceeding should be exercised very sparingly and with circumspection and that too, in the
rarest of rare cases; the Court also warned that the Court would not be justified in embarking
upon an enquiry as to the reliability or genuineness or otherwise of the allegations made in
the FIR or the complaint and that the extraordinary or inherent powers do not confer an
arbitrary jurisdiction on the Court to act according to its whims or caprice. In para 102 of the
judgment, it was held as under:
“In the backdrop of the interpretation of the various relevant provisions of the Code under
Chapter XIV and of the principles of law enunciated by this Court in a series of decisions
relating to the exercise of the extraordinary power Under Article 226 or the inherent powers
Under Section 482 of the Code which we have extracted and reproduced above, we give the
following categories of cases by way of illustration wherein such power could be exercised
15
State of Haryana and Ors. v. Bhajan Lal and Ors: (1992) Supp (1) SCC 335

20
either to prevent abuse of the process of any court or otherwise to secure the ends of justice,
though it may not be possible to lay down any precise, clearly defined and sufficiently
channelised and inflexible guidelines or rigid formulae and to give an exhaustive list of
myriad kinds of cases wherein such power should be exercised.
(1) Where the allegations made in the first information report or the complaint, even if they
are taken at their face value and accepted in their entirety do not prima facie constitute any
offence or make out a case against the accused.
(2) Where the allegations in the first information report and other materials, if any,
accompanying the FIR do not disclose a cognizable offence, justifying an investigation by
police officers Under Section 156(1) of the Code except under an order of a Magistrate
within the purview of Section 155(2) of the Code.
(3) Where the uncontroverted allegations made in the FIR or complaint and the evidence
collected in support of the same do not disclose the commission of any offence and make out
a case against the accused.
(4) Where, the allegations in the FIR do not constitute a cognizable offence but constitute
only a non-cognizable offence, no investigation is permitted by a police officer without an
order of a Magistrate as contemplated Under Section 155(2) of the Code.
(5) Where the allegations made in the FIR or complaint are so absurd and inherently
improbable on the basis of which no prudent person can ever reach a just conclusion that
there is sufficient ground for proceeding against the accused.
(6) Where there is an express legal bar engrafted in any of the provisions of the Code or the
concerned Act (under which a criminal proceeding is instituted) to the institution and
continuance of the proceedings and/or where there is a specific provision in the Code or the
concerned Act, providing efficacious redress for the grievance of the aggrieved party.
(7) Where a criminal proceeding is manifestly attended with mala fide and/or where the
proceeding is maliciously instituted with an ulterior motive for wreaking vengeance on the
accused and with a view to spite him due to private and personal grudge.”
While discussing the scope and ambit of Section 482 of the Code, a similar view has been
taken by a Division Bench of the Apex Court in Rajiv Thapar and Ors. v. Madan Lal
Kapoor16 wherein it was held as under:
“The issue being examined in the instant case is the jurisdiction of the High Court under
section 482 Code of Criminal Procedure, if it chooses to quash the initiation of the
prosecution against an accused at the stage of issuing process, or at the stage of committal, or
16
Rajiv Thapar and Ors. v. Madan Lal Kapoor: (2013) 3 SCC 330

21
even at the stage of framing of charges. These are all stages before the commencement of the
actual trial. The same parameters would naturally be available for later stages as well. The
power vested in the High Court under section 482 Code of Criminal Procedure, at the stages
referred to hereinabove, would have far-reaching consequences inasmuch as it would negate
the prosecution’s case without allowing the prosecution/complainant to lead evidence. Such a
determination must always be rendered with caution, care and circumspection. To invoke its
inherent jurisdiction Under Section 482 Code of Criminal Procedure the High Court has to be
fully satisfied that the material produced by the accused is such that would lead to the
conclusion that their defence is based on sound, reasonable, and indubitable facts; the
material produced is such as would Rule out and displace the assertions contained in the
charges levelled against the accused; and the material produced is such as would clearly
reject and overrule the veracity of the allegations contained in the accusations levelled by the
prosecution/complainant. It should be sufficient to Rule out, reject and discard the
accusations levelled by the prosecution/complainant, without the necessity of recording any
evidence. For this the material relied upon by the defence should not have been refuted, or
alternatively, cannot be justifiably refuted, being material of sterling and impeccable quality.
The material relied upon by the accused should be such as would persuade a reasonable
person to dismiss and condemn the actual basis of the accusations as false. In such a situation,
the judicial conscience of the High Court would persuade it to exercise its power Under
Section 482 Code of Criminal Procedure to quash such criminal proceedings, for that would
prevent abuse of process of the court and secure the ends of justice.
Based on the factors canvassed in the foregoing paragraphs, we would delineate the following
steps to determine the veracity of a prayer for quashing of FIR raised by an accused by
invoking the power vested in the High Court under section 482 Code of Criminal Procedure:
Step one: whether the material relied upon by the accused is sound, reasonable, and
indubitable i.e. the material is of sterling and impeccable quality?
Step two: whether the material relied upon by the accused would rule out the assertions
contained in the charges levelled against the accused i.e. the material is sufficient to reject
and overrule the factual assertions contained in the complaint i.e. the material is such as
would persuade a reasonable person to dismiss and condemn the factual basis of the
accusations as false?
Step three: whether the material relied upon by the accused has not been refuted by the
prosecution/complainant; and/or the material is such that it cannot be justifiably refuted by
the prosecution/complainant?

22
Step four: whether proceeding with the trial would result in an abuse of process of the court,
and would not serve the ends of justice?
If the answer to all the steps is in the affirmative, the judicial conscience of the High Court
should persuade it to quash such criminal proceedings in exercise of power vested in it Under
Section 482 Code of Criminal Procedure. Such exercise of power, besides doing justice to the
accused, would save precious court time, which would otherwise be wasted in holding such a
trial (as well as proceedings arising there from) especially when it is clear that the same
would not conclude in the conviction of the accused.”

CONCLUSION

The entire purpose of preparing an inquest report is to investigate into, and draw up a report
of apparent cause of death, describing such wounds as may be found on the body of the
deceased and stating, in what manner, or by what weapon or instrument such wounds appear
to have been inflicted. The object of inquest is merely to ascertain whether a person died
under suspicious or unnatural circumstances and, if so, what was its apparent cause. The
question who assaulted him or how he was assaulted or under what circumstances he was
assaulted are foreign to the ambit of an inquest. Name of the accused persons need not be
mentioned in the inquest because the basic purpose of inquest is to inquire into apparent
cause of death, namely, whether it is suicidal, homicidal, or accidental or by some machinery.
The inquest report cannot be treated as substantive evidence but may be utilized for

23
contradicting the witnesses of inquest. However, the Law Commission of India in its 206th
Report has recommended that inquest report should be regarded as material evidence in any
court or other criminal proceedings. The commission has also recommended that the Coroner
should have powers to cover the cases of unnatural deaths even if the death is caused beyond
the territorial jurisdiction of India.

24
BIBLIOGRAPHY

BOOKS

 Ratanlal and Dhirajlal, Criminal Procedural Code

 Sarkars, Code of Criminal Procedure

CASES

 Kuldeep Singh v State of Punjab (2005) 3 RCR 599 (P&H).

 Podda Narayana v. State of A.P. AIR 1975 SC 1252
 Shakila Khader v. Nausher Gama AIR 1975 SC 1324
 Surendra Tiwari v. State of Madhya Pradesh AIR 1991 SC 1853
 Amar Singh v. Balwinder Singh 2003 (2) SCC 518
 Radha Mohan Singh v. Lal Saheb, AIR 2006 SC 951
 Shri Bhagwant Singh v. Commissioner of Police, Delhi, 1983 Cr.L.J. 1081 at 1086
(SC)
 Nirpal Singh. v. State of Haryana, AIR 1977 SC 1066
 Manoj Kumar Sharma and Others vs. State of Chattisgarh and Others (2016) 9 SCC 1.
 George and Ors. v. State of Kerala and Anr. (1998) 4 SCC 605
 Suresh Rai and Ors. v. State of Bihar: (2000) 4 SCC 84.
 Jai Prakash Singh v. State of Bihar and Anr.: (2012) 4 SCC 379
 State of Haryana and Ors. v. Bhajan Lal and Ors: (1992) Supp (1) SCC 335
 Rajiv Thapar and Ors. v. Madan Lal Kapoor: (2013) 3 SCC 330

JOURNALS

 Inquest of Inquest Report, Mr. Ashwani Panth, Dr. Neha Bhasin, Dr. N.K. Bhal. Vol.
4, Amity International Journal of Juridicial Sciences, 2018

25